4 comments:

It's almost understandable when some people say "they had it coming." Usually that's in the context of the local petro-chemical industry, its contribution to climate change and, hence, severe storm events of increasing severity, frequency and duration. Yet there's more to Houston's suffering than that. When these calamities hit it's not unusual for the local papers to undertake a conscience-clearing exercise. In Houston's this consisted of some pretty pathetic laments about how developers have engineered Houston and environment to maximize their profits while draining and backfilling or paving over the city's natural flood defences. It's said that generations of politicians have depended on campaign funding from developers to win elections in a system that then allows these same developers carte blanche afterward. And so, yes, the local citizens do bear some responsibility for their plight by allowing their local and state governments to become utterly transactional.

As the report says, Mound, the area has been a kind of 'wild west' for developers for a long time. The lesson for us is to learn from these mistakes and scrutinize all new development with an eye to preserving and increasing permeability rather than continue to pave over paradise. This, of course, is easier said than done.

Here in Ontario, developers have long held sway. If they don't like the policies and decisions rendered by municipalities, they simply appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, which has historically overruled local decisions in their favour. Kathleen Wynne has promised to reform the process, but I will believe it when I see it.